oblems. ready to change your routine? ask your doctor about once-a-day xarelto®. for more information including cost support options, call 1-888-xarelto or visit goxarelto.com. yeah. then how'd i get this... [ voice of dennis ] ...safe driving bonus check? every six months without an accident, allstate sends a check. ok. [ voice of dennis ] silence. are you in good hands? moments ago, you may have missed this big drama, bill

karins and mike doing a little catch and release. watch this nate archibald reaction from bill karins. we asked you at the top of the show why you are possibly awake. john? >> eric says i early" is like my "nightly news." >> just i wait, i'll be slow jamming on tomorrow's episode. what else? >> greg writes, hey, i'm here at the dubliner. where is everyone? >> john, be patient. wait four years. we'll be back with you. stand by. thanks everybody for watching. "morning joe" bee gigins right . ♪ and the rockets' red glare ♪ the bombs bursting in air ♪ gave proof through the night ♪ that our flag was still there ♪

♪ o say does that >> good morning. it's wednesday, january 23rd. a beautiful rendition of that. has she torn the earpiece out yet? because she was just so into it. that was the best move. if you're going to be a phony on the biggest stage in the world, go all the way with it. >> are you really speaking now, joe? >> i may not be. i may have recorded this last night because it's too cold in here. with us on set in washington, nbc news capitol correspondent, kelly o'donnell, nbc political analyst and former chairman of the republican national committee, michael steele and also white house correspondent for the huffington post, sam stein. msnbc and "time" analyst mark halperin. and nbc contributor and all-around great guy, mike

barnicle. sam, if i said the words "milli vanilli" and put them together, you wouldn't know what i was talking about. >> that's true. i wasn't alive. >> were you alive for milli vanilli? >> "blame it on the rain." >> that's pretty good. halperin, come on. this is huge. >> i'm all good with it. >> beyonce -- you're fine with it. it's okay. >> it's performance. it's just performance. >> she still sang it. >> yeah. also, you know what? she looked great. she added a lot of electricity. >> what does that have to do with anything? sing the song. >> well, here's my question. the marine band said they did not have time to rehearse. and i worked the weekend, i was on the hill, kelly clarkson rehearsed, other people rehearsed. i'm a huge beyonce fan. if you're going to sing at the inauguration, how do you not have time to rehearse? >> it's the biggest stage in the world. >> yeah. you've got to put it out there live. it's not a big deal, but i think

a lot of people were disappointed to know that in the moment, it wasn't her voice. >> obama was lip-syncing, too. >> well, the last four years. >> mike barnicle's laughing about this. "star spangled scam." all right, mike barnicle. mika is deeply offended by this. and when she jets in from the south of france on a real jet, g-5, she'll tell us about it. but mike, you're nonplussed by this as well, aren't you. >> oh, yeah. beyonce's great. so what? we could have had -- you know, so what, we could have had the cowsills singing and no one would have known the difference. it's no big deal. no big deal. >> all right. well, no big deal all around. >> we lip-synced the last half of monday's show, joe, because we were all at the dubliner. >> you could tell. >> don't you feel bad for her -- >> no. >> here she is, this international superstar, great moment and now people are making fun of her. it's a shame.

it would have been worth it to take the chance and sing it live. >> we just want to believe. >> james taylor -- james taylor sang it live. >> allegedly. >> no? he's j.t. >> maybe she had a cold or something. maybe there will be an explanation. >> she should have listened to bill o'reilly. >> i don't even know what that means. >> do it live. all right. with that happy note, today republicans in the house are expected to vote on a plan that's going to defuse the debt ceiling crisis at least temporarily. republicans are planning to offer legislation that will suspend the enforcement of the federal debt limit for at least three months, allowing the government to keep borrowing money to pay for all of its current obligations. in exchange, the house gop'ers want the democratic-controlled senate to do something they haven't done in 1,365 days, pass a budget. something that body hasn't done since 2009. now, instead of demanding spending cuts, republicans have added a provision to the bill

that would suspend lawmakers' own paychecks if their chamber fails to pass a budget by april 15th. that's a lot like actually the no labels, no budget, no pay plan that that organization's been dealing with, talking about for a long time. michael steele, i think that's a great idea. >> i do, too. >> if you don't do your job -- >> why get paid for it? >> and the democrats in the senate haven't done their job in that many days, why pay them? >> i don't think you should. in fact, if i had my way, it would be retro. so i'd take back the money we paid you over the last four years for not doing your job. and i think, you know, again, some people say that's a political toy or a tactic. the reality of it is, it does reflect where congress is right now. and i think it will work for a lot of people to say yeah, we're going to pay you, then do your job. and i think this is a good move. we'll see how they respond. >> you know, kelly, neither republicans nor democrats have been allowed to do their job on the hill for a very long time. and i know you hear this all the

time. and it's one of the -- it's really one of the things that unites at least 95% of the members. they're sick and tired of getting elected to go up to washington, do their job, sit on committees, work through bills that come through their committees, and then take those bills to the house floor, the senate floor, vote on them, then go to conference. i joked before, it was a lot like, you know, i'm just a bill. "schoolhouse rock." that doesn't happen anymore. americans don't realize that you always end up with a couple of people behind closed doors in the back -- we were on the hill yesterday. i heard this complaint from republicans, from democrats, from senators, from congressmen and congresswomen. they all say the same thing. we don't get to do our jobs. they come up here and in the end it's always the president and john boehner in a back room, and we just sit around. >> so much of the disillusionment you hear from

members who feel they're going to make a difference is exactly what you're talking about. and so much of the infighting is really not so much between the parties, while there's plenty of that, there is such a frustration between house and senate. they openly knock each other in the hallways because they operate differently. and we have this whole sort of filibuster battle going on in the senate. the rules and how do things get through. and on the house side over and over again, there's this weary sense of they've passed some things. they may not be popular everywhere, but they did pass a budget. so what they're trying to do with this no budget, no pay is to sort of turn up the screws on the senate. and so republicans hoping to not get the blame for some of these fights are trying to focus a light on the senate not passing a budget which most people don't even realize has happened. >> i get your point, though. it's got to be frustrating to see the big debates get resolved in this backroom brinksmanship. >> with absolutely no transparency. >> it used to be committees would have jurisdiction over the appropriations in their subset, right? and now we have a budget process

which -- let's put aside the budget itself for a second. the appropriations process has broken down, too, and we're just doing things by cr, continuing resolution. so basically you've given power to a few very powerful congressmen, and all the other members are sitting there waiting to be told what to wait for. >> mark halperin, it is frustrating. and this has been going on for some time, and it's really dangerous for a democracy when you have two bodies -- and actually, one run by a democrat, the other run by a republican -- who operate with a handful of people running the entire show where 90% -- 95% of the representatives and the senators don't have a say in the big deals because the staffs of a couple of leaders go into the back rooms. they go behind closed doors. they emerge with a deal and then tell the members, you have to vote up or down on this. you have -- this isn't going to committee. >> and you have two days. >> there are no amendments.

we're not going to give you time to read these bills. and oh, yeah, by the way, they involve billions and billions of dollars. >> joe, you're going to remember whose line the, the democratic speaker of the house says to his colleagues, the republicans are the opposition, but the senate is the enemy. the gap between the two chambers is pretty big. what's exciting to me now and interesting to me is that public opinion may start to matter. the president -- we've talked about, starting this new organization, organizing for action to try to get public opinion to influence what goes on on capitol hill, to take an osd game and influence the inside game. what speaker boehner is doing with this proposal on pay, overwhelmingly i bet the american people support the notion. they can't get paid if they don't do their job. will harry reid and mitch mcconnell, will they actually feel either based on the efforts of the house or what the president does, will they feel like hey, we need to listen to what the country wants.

there's still populism out there particularly with the economy bad and feeling washington needs to get its act together. >> joe? >> yeah. >> that asks -- that leads me to ask, you know, the group, what happens if within the white house, off of what mark just said, because this will be increasingly popular if the republicans continue to do things like this, what happens if the white house decides to try and pick off specific members of the republican membership in the house and perhaps some republicans in the senate and basically say people like you more now if you come and try and meet us halfway. what happens to this whole ball game if that occurs? >> i actually think the ball game is changing. the front of "the washington post" says that the gop offers respite on debt. "the new york times" also talks about how the republicans have gone ahead and pushed for -- obviously for this three-month extension that we're talking about. and mike, this goes back again to the republican party, not

being conservative, not being moderate, but being smart. turning their back on their stupid ways as they set themselves up for punching bags which they've done time and time again through the years. again, i think this three-month move last week that they've made, i think it's a very shrewd move. it's one of the first shrewd moves i've seen the body do in quite some time. i've seen republicans do in some time. and we were -- mika and i were up on the hill all yesterday afternoon. and i've got to say, the republicans i spoke with gave me hope. michael, they didn't give me hope because they said we're going to compromise because you know -- actually, this is the great irony. you know, people, scarborough is a rino. i don't want them to compromise on spending cuts. >> right. >> in fact, i want them to cut more than they will cut. i want them to go further on medicare, on social security. i want them to go further on the

middle-class entitlements in the out years. not now. i don't want any seniors to be hurt now. but in the out years where it really explodes. i want them to be more aggressive on tax reform. i want them to cut defense spending much more. i hope the sequestration goes through. >> right. >> i want those defense cuts. and after we do those defense cuts, we need more defense cuts. we need to stop occupying countries for a decade at a time. we've got to stop spending $2 billion a week. i am mr. cut. call me mr. cut. i am more conservative than most republicans on the hill. that said, what gave me comfort yesterday was, i talked to party leaders, and i talked to the rank and file on both sides. they seemed to understand that they've walked into traps time and time again. and they're ready to start playing smart. that's good. >> that's very good. and i think they've had, you know, to your point, joe "cut

man" scarborough, they understand that you can have the arguments all day long on cutting and spending, but if you consistently fall into the president's traps on the social issues and on a bunch of other things out there is that distract from the main argument you want to make about the growth and health of the economy, then you're going nowhere. i think they're now beginning to realize that. and i think the inaugural speech kind of put that in reference for them -- and perspective for them in the sense that the president pretty much said, you know what? yeah. not only did we win in '08, we won again. and now we're going to do it my way. and i think for a lot of them, they realize, wow, they've got a lot of momentum behind them. the president's got that kind of energy. now we need to play ball. and how they play ball in the next few weeks and this window you talk about, joe, gives them the room they need to really drill down on a message, a core message. pretty much in line with what you're talking about, a fiscal

conservative message about cutting the growth, the size, the spending that the government is currently engaged in to protect those very programs that the left is so hunkered down on and so concerned about for out year and for future generations. >> and the thing is, the president, if he wants to pass a sweeping bill on global warming, if he wants to go after cap and trade again, that's very easy. you can say if you're john boehner, well, that's fantastic. democrats, this is a democratic -- this is a democratic plan. you guys want it. it's a priority for you. guess what? you control the senate. you guys -- you guys pass global warming in the legislation in the senate, then we'll look at it in the house. gay marriage, fantastic. we are open to whatever you pass. that's your top priority, great. why don't you guys in the senate pass it, and then we'll look at it. and you can do the same thing with gun control, actually an issue that matters a great deal

to me. actually, not gun control but assault weapons control. again, do what they did before. pass that in the senate and let them do that and say, but i'll tell you what we're going to focus on. we're going to focus on the house on getting people back to work, saving entitlement programs, and taking care of the crushing debt and making the tax code simpler, making the tax code fair. we're going to take care of the meat and potatoes issues over here. we're going to take care of making social security stronger. you guys pass your global warming plan over there. we're going to focus on getting americans back to work. go ahead. handle all the social issues. >> what's interesting is what you're outlining, and i think it's probably a smart play for republicans is a reversal of the two chambers. usually it's the senate that serves as the cooling saucer for legislation. you're saying let's be the house be the cooling saucer for democratically-sponsored legislation, focus on passing stuff in its own time. >> the president, sam, laid those out as democratic

priorities. >> yeah, sure. >> in his inauguration, he said these are my top priorities, and that's great. the fantastic thing for the president, he's got harry reid running the democratic senate, so let them run the president's priorities through there, and republicans that control the house can focus on getting people back to work, saving social security, and reforming the tax code. >> and i think to that point, what we're talking about earlier, one of the things that republicans seem to be doing more now is looking at things in the long-game perspective as opposed to the short-game perspective. and they realize they don't control governments. and it's going to be very difficult for them to pass what they want to pass. but they can get some of it done. they have to get it through the right context. >> so sam said, kelly -- and i want to go to mark and mike after this and ask them the same question -- sam said it was going to be hard for republicans to pass what they want to pass. so let's talk about the president's top priorities. global warming. what's the likelihood that the president is going to get the

democratic senate to pass something on, let's say, cap and trade with all of the moderate democrats running in red states? let's let the democratic senate do that. when are we going to see a cap and trade bill come out of the united states senate passed? >> well, i wouldn't bet on that. >> you wouldn't bet on that. >> in the sort of the quiet afternoon, the republican of oklahoma, the head of the committee that would be involved in this, gave one of those lonely addresses on the senate floor. respectful of the president. he said many times -- >> that's good. >> -- many times, even said he would miss lisa jackson, the epa head who is leaving that job. >> lisa's a wonderful, wonderful person. but my question is, why would senator inhofe miss her because he hasn't been really nice to her. >> he said because she has told him the truth in hearings. that's the reason i gave. >> that's great. lisa's a great person.

>> but getting something to move on that would be very difficult. harry reid said it will be patry murray in charge of the budget to deal with these other issues. >> so the president -- one of the president's top priorities is global warming. and you're saying that's probably not going to pass through a democratic senate. what about gay marriage? what about gay marriage bills? what's the likelihood? this is another top priority for the president. the president has a democratic senate. what's the likelihood of the democratic senate, under the leader some of of harry reid, passing sweeping -- i'm just asking, you don't think so? >> there's a bill that promotes the constitutional right to gay marriage. that's not going anywhere, obviously. everybody's waiting for the supreme court. >> mark halperin, let me ask you the same thing, the president's top priorities that were laid out. we hear that republicans are going to be obstructionist. what is the likelihood of us getting sweeping global warmi i legislation or gay marriage legislation? >> i think i know where this is

going. >> actually, you understand my point. the point is republicans don't have to scream and yell. they don't have to call the president a marxist or say he hates america or that he's a radical. just let the democrats take it up in the senate, mark. if these are his top priorities, then let the democrats pass the president's own top priorities. if the democratic senate can't even pass the president's top priorities, they must be outside the mainstream of middle america. i'm not saying they are. i don't think they are. i just am curious, though, if you think the democrats in the senate could pass the president's top priorities as stated in the inauguration. >> as a snapshot today, they can. but if you look at this more in a dynamic way, i think there are two issues that can go first that sequence to two later issues when mike talked about before picking people up. if the president can do an

immigration bill and a mini-bargain on spending cuts, which i know you keep accusing me of being charlie brown running up to the football, but i think with this three-month delay -- >> can you explain that, by the way? >> sure. >> the charlie brown -- how long have you been telling me the president was going to be responsible on saving social security and medicare? >> a long time, but i think his inner tom coburn is going to come out finally here in the next couple months. >> you have just insulted the president of the -- actually, he likes tom a lot, i think. >> the president wants legacy. and not just because of, like, not because of ego, but there's certain things he wants to leave office having done. now is the time, if he wants to do -- if he wants to do gun control and he wants to do a big energy environment bill, i think the only way to do it is to finally get bipartisan muscles working, do some populist things like cut their pay and send them home on passing a budget, get a mini-deal with significant spending cuts, not a grand barga

bargain, but significant spending cuts, maybe a reform of the entitlement programs, pass a bill there, pass a bill on immigration by tax day. and then in the second half of this year, move on and do a gun bill and do an energy environment bill. and i think if he does that -- and i don't think that's impossible -- i think 2013 can be an extraordinarily productive year for the president and the country on shared priorities in both parties that would get the country to believe washington can work again. and that's his best bet right now to turn the economy around because i don't sese a lot of possibilities that anything washington is going to do directly is going to bring jobs back, and that is still the issue for the country. >> mike, your take on what the president was doing a couple of days ago with his inaugural speech. was he just playing for history on some of these social issues, on gay marriage, on global warming, or do you think he's actually going to be able to pass that through a senate that's going to be controlled by moderate democrats? >> no, i think it was for real

the other day, joe. i have a slight disagreement with mark. you get the impression from talking to a few people in the administration and a few people on the hill that the two pivot points that the president is going to push in the next three months are going to be universal registration on guns, background checks on guns. >> background checks, right. >> and immigration in order to continue to try and pick off some republicans and pull them toward a more moderate middle under the premise that, you know, hey, people will like you more. come with me on this. and get background checks and immigration on the boards before opening day. >> what's that? >> i'm sorry. the house judiciary committee is not going to move a significant piece of anti-gun legislation in the current dynamic. you're going to have to break things up with some other compromises. >> are you saying, mark halperin, that the house republicans are going to actually block background checks, that 85% of americans support, are they really going to be held hostage to the

absolutism of wayne lapierre? >> i just don't think the house judiciary committee is going to do anything right now. i just don't. >> well, let me just say to my republican brothers and sisters, good luck with that. universal background checks are -- they're going to be front and center. >> 85%, it was 92%. >> is it 92% now? and these numbers are only going to get higher as we focus. they're going to get higher on the universal background checks, these magazines, high-capacity magazines, are indefensible. we're not talking about gun control. i mean, there are millions and millions of rifles out there, shotguns out there, handguns out there, and they're going to stay out there. abraham lincoln was right. the greatest foreign power from overseas couldn't take a drink from the ohio river. forget our army.

just the hunters coming out of wisconsin and pennsylvania and alabama and georgia and northwest florida. we're not talking about gun control. we're talking about assault weapon control, and we're talking about these high-capacity magazines. and we're talking about universal background checks. if republicans obstruct on that, they are going to be not only on the wrong side of history, they're going to be on the wrong side of politics this cycle. coming up, we're going to be bringing in former national security adviser and hunter, big-time hunter, dr. brzezinski. also, "the washington post's" bob woodward, political commentator cokie roberts and former red sox manager now with the indians, terry francona and amy klobuchar and senator jeff

flake. first, bill karins with a check on the forecast. i want sunny in new england. >> maybe next week. yesterday was kind of a novelty day, the first really cold day of the winter in new england and the mid-atlantic. now that it's here to stay, now it's time to get a little bit annoyed. the windchill this morning, you'll feel it as you walk out the door. we're at five in d.c. we're at negative one in central park in new york city. and look at our friends in northern new england. your windchill this morning is negative 20 in burlington. and our friends all the way up there at the very tip of maine, caribou at minus 29. one of the coldest spots in the entire country. now, here's what the deal is. this arctic air is on a one-week vacation in the lower 48. specifically the northern plains to new england. a week from right now, here's what the weather pattern will look like. some of the cold air a little bit retreats to the rockies and the mild air will return to the east. so if you can deal with this for one week, then it will be all said and done and hopefully this will be the coldest week of the winter. so look at these temperatures today. as i said, this is as cold as it gets for new england in the wintertime.

and areas of the northern plains still frigid from chicago to minneapolis. our friends in dallas to florida along the gulf. you want to go somewhere warm, 71 in dallas and denver, mid-60s, too. no complaints out of that region. you're watching "morning joe." nice shot. we're brewed by starbucks.

mostly it was a day of celebration. there were musical performances from james taylor, beyonce and kelly clarkson. this is good. kelly clarkson was asked to sing "my country 'tis of thee." she's making her way to the podium. and as she does, well, look at this. what do you know, it's bill clinton.

seeing what she's doing there. let's watch that again in slow motion. the question is, is president clinton checking her out? and the answer is yes. >> oh, come on. that is such a cheap shot. let's take a look at "morning papers." "the wall street journal" this morning, british prime minister david cameron made a critical speech on the united kingdom's rocky relationship with the european union. cameron proposed a referendum which would allow british voters to decide whether or not they should exit the eu by 2017. cameron argued for continued membership but in a more streamlined european union with fewer restrictive regulations. >> from our parade of papers, "the omaha world herald," the governor of nebraska has given the okay for the keystone pipeline to run through his state effectively leaving the decision now of whether or not to green-light the 1700-mile

project to the obama administration. the president has pushed back a decision on the project until after march, but the pipeline's future remains in doubt as president obama rejected a plan a year ago, you'll recall, saying the legislation didn't give enough time for the government to give it a thorough review. >> and you know, michael steele, we were talking this morning about how the republicans move forward in a more thoughtful, strategic way. still being tough. >> yeah. >> you can be tough. you can be conservative. you can still be smart. >> be smart. that's right. >> we haven't been smart. a guy who has been smart, chris christie. new quinnipiac poll numbers out this morning. i want you guys -- republicans, you can actually be conservative. you can actually fight, and you can actually win. listen to these numbers. chris christie's approval rating right now, 74% in new jersey. with a 21% disapproval. he's 56% approval rating among

democrats, 78% among independents. and was governor christie right to criticize john boehner? 79% say yes. 15% say no. 70% of republicans say yes, that it was right for him to criticize john boehner. and the house. let's bring in mike allen with "politico." that's instructive, is it not, mike allen? to republicans who think that when you start talking about playing smart, that you're talking about backing down and caving in to democrats and democratic special interest gr, chris christie has shown, you can be tough and you can win, but you've got to be smart at the same time. >> that's why republicans around washington think that chris christie might even be the favorite as you look at the 2016 field. he's from outside washington. and he has this real record of doing something. and he appeals to conservatives. another way that the house

republicans are playing smarter or shrewder, as you said earlier, "politico" just popped up a story about how speaker boehner, with the help of paul ryan, turned around a conference that was ready to go off the next cliff. they wanted to shut down the government. they wanted to default on america's debt. at that williamsburg retreat, he walked them through what the consequences of that was, showed them polling about the blame that they would take for it, let them talk instead of imposing a solution on them. and very calmly, with paul ryan being the key salesman because of his credibility with conservatives, convincing them to go ahead with this three-month extension that joe, you say, is a smart idea. >> it is a smart idea. and this morning, you know, we were talking about chris christie being one of the favorites in 2016. "politico" this morning's going behind the curtain again with a question that everybody in washington's asking. are the democrats going to be

putting up joe biden for president in 2016? here's how the vice president answered that question when asked yesterday. >> is there any reason you wouldn't run? >> oh, there's a whole lot of reasons why i wouldn't run. i haven't made that decision. and i don't have to make that decision for a while. >> so are you ready to run against hillary clinton in 2016? >> i haven't made that judgment, and hillary hasn't made that judgment, but i can tell you what. everything that should be done over the next two years that i should be part of would have to be done whether i run or i don't run. if this administration is successful, whoever is running as a democrat's better positioned to win. if we're not successful, whoever runs as the nominee is going to be less likely to win. >> you know, mike allen, there are a few reasons why joe biden might not run. one of them that i can think of right off the top of my head is

if a meteor crashes into the naval observatory, a la armageddon style, perhaps he wouldn't run. but we look at these pictures of the vice president, a guy who we've always admitted, we love. and this doesn't look like a guy who's not running four years from now. guys who aren't running four years from now walk down the middle of the street and smile. he's running. >> no, that's right, joe. and you've been out and about here this weekend. you know that the big buzz among democrats is how the vice president's being increasingly obvious about getting ready. he stopped by the big iowa state ball during the inaugural. and something that was unannounced, the vice president had 200 people including a lot of new hampshire, iowa, south carolina early-state folks to a party up at the vice president's mansion. a who's who of american politics, developing relationships, something very fascinating, we discovered, in talking to people around the vice president for this column

was that during the campaign, he not only took on the fund-raising assignments that chicago gave him, he really embraced it. he dove into the obama/biden fund-raising, inviting top donors up to the mansion for dinner, so really developed relationships with the obama people. >> all right. mike allen, it is a fascinating story. we will continue, obviously, to be following it for the next four years. and we'll get mark halperin's input on the other side of the break. but also, up next, serena williams is stunned at the australian open, losing to a 19-year-old american. we're going to show you why williams lost her cool ahead in sports. i was overweight my whole life. i obsessed about my weight my whole life. and then, weight watchers.

i amazed myself. get used to it. introducing the new weight watchers 360 program. join for free and expect amazing. because it works. to help protect your eye health as you age... would you take it? well, there is. [ male announcer ] it's called ocuvite. a vitamin totally dedicated to your eyes, from the eye care experts at bausch + lomb. as you age, eyes can lose vital nutrients. ocuvite helps replenish key eye nutrients. ocuvite has a unique formula not found in your multivitamin to help protect your eye health. now that's a pill worth taking. [ male announcer ] ocuvite. help protect your eye health. so we created the extraordinarily comfortable sleep number experience. a collection of innovations designed around a bed with dualair technology that allows you to adjust to the support your body needs - each of your bodies. our sleep professionals will help you find your sleep number setting. exclusively at a sleep number store. sleep number.

comfort individualized. queen mattresses start at just $699. and save $500 on our special edition bed set. now at the sleep number white sale. aww man. [ male announcer ] returns are easy with free pickup from the u.s. postal service. we'll even drop off boxes if you need them. visit usps.com pay, print, and have it picked up for free. any time of year. ♪

nice sweater. thank you. ♪

a little sports now. a stunning upset has bounced serena williams, out of the u.s. open, she lost to 19-year-old sloane stephens, now the only american woman left standing after she beat williams three sets this morning australia time. here's a clearly frustrated williams, here's a little aftermath. she lost that third set 6-4 after hurting her back in the second set.

that slowed her serve down considerably. it's the first time williams has lost since all the way back to august 17th. it means the 29th seeded stephens is now going to play her first career grand slam, looking happy there, semifinals tomorrow against defending champion victoria azarenka. an nba game, the clippers hosting the thunder, two of the best teams in the west. play of the game not from a player, from a ref. shot is blocked right into the face of the referee. that's derek richardson, takes the blocked shot directly in the face, knocks him on his bum, but he's okay, shakes it off, stays in the game. thunder wins the matchup, 109-97. and we should mention also sportily, terry francona going to be on the show this morning to discuss his new book about his years with the sox. that's going to be coming up a little bit later here on "morning joe." "new york times'" jeff zellny, as i like to say, rhymes in felony, is in the bureau. the camera's looking for him

there. cornhusker jeff zeleny will join "morning joe" to talk about the "must-read opinion pages." keep it here. jeff zeleny on "morning joe."

email marketing from constant contact reaches people in a place they're checking every day -- their inbox. and it gives you the tools to create custom emails that drive business. it's just one of the ways constant contact can help you grow your small business.

sign up for your free trial today at constantcontact.com/try. the delightful discovery. the sweet realization that you have a moment all to yourself. well, almost. splenda® no calorie sweetener. splenda® makes the moment yours™. with multiple lacerations to the wing and a fractured beak. surgery was successful,

but he will be in a cast until it is fully healed, possibly several months. so, if the duck isn't able to work, how will he pay for his living expenses? aflac. like his rent and car payments? aflac. what about gas and groceries? aflac. cell phone? aflac, but i doubt he'll be using his phone for quite a while cause like i said, he has a fractured beak. [ male announcer ] send the aflac duck a get-well card at getwellduck.com. beautiful, beautiful shot of the capitol. we should put it up here. follow @richard haass, president on council on foreign relations. it would make his day. he'd be proud if he picked some followers up. that's two "as," two "ss."

with us now, jeff zeleny. jeff, we're going to be reading your wonderful article in our must-reads. four more years, but it's the first one that really counts. "as the president begins promoting his agenda of tackling gun control, immigration and climate change even while bracing for yet another deadline-driven fiscal debate with republicans, his advisers are scrambling to prioritize his ambitions to avoid squandering presh time. tensions are already emerging between the mouse and some democrats about how much emphasis the president and vice president should give their gun-control measures and whether a drawn-out debate over the second amendment could imperil the rest of the party's initiatives, particularly on immigration. for all of the revelry surrounding the president's second inauguration this week, mr. obama, his aides and congressional allies know their window of opportunity narrows with each passing month." jeff, fascinating. there's so many things to talk about here. let's start, though, first with the realization because it's so

important, they do realize, then, that their window narrows every month and basically by the midterms, they're coasting to the end. >> and i think some people in the west wing aren't even sure they have until the midterms. they know they have 2013 or they hope they have 2013. one problem is always unexpected things happen that the white house isn't even thinking of right now. in reporting this story, we found out that president obama is actually aware of this. he is more self-aware than i perhaps thought he was on this. he's been looking at george w. bush's early part of the second term. but the question is what are they going to do about this? they do have a lot of things on their plate with gun control. how much are they going to push this? senate democrats, as you've been saying all morning, are their biggest problem here. >> can you talk about that? because i heard john barrasso, a republican leader in the senate, talk about, gosh, a large number of senate democrats that are running in states where barack obama got below 45%. >> it's tough for them.

>> democrats are running in republican territory two years from now in a lot of these senate races, right? >> no question. and a lot of these issues, obviously like on gun control and things are things that these senate democrats don't want to talk about at all. the re-election prospects -- i mean, it's too early to say who's going to be controlling the senate after 2014, but democrats will have an uphill climb. you look at senator kay hagen from north carolina. she has a tough re-election fight on her hands. there's a whole handful of others. >> and again, here's a good example. you look at the president's three priorities that he laid out at the inauguration. in his inaugural speech. climate change. kay hagen, even though this is critically important for democrats and progressives and some republicans, kay hagen can't take that back to north carolina and campaign hard on that in the next two years any more than she can on gay marriage, national gay marriage issue. that will work in a lot of

states. as we were saying yesterday, progress is on the march in this area. a lot of democrats believe. but that march hasn't gone through north carolina yet. and the same thing with gun control, an issue that certainly assault weapon control matters a lot to me. but in north carolina statewide, you almost feel like a republican could push that bettbet er than a democrat. >> no question. >> a democrat, it feeds into all of people's worst suspicion about them on guns. >> these are tough votes. and john tester said yesterday, look, we need to talk about the budget and the budget only right now. a lot of these guys were clapping during the president's speech. it was soshtd ofrt of a feel-go moment. a lot of those things are not going to get through the senate or won't even be brought up. the gay marriage and things were sort of for history more than actually for practice. >> i was going to ask, jeff, the president, then, knew while he was giving that speech that a lot of those measures weren't going to be able to pass through

his own democratic senate. it was for the history books? >> he'd better realize that, or they're not going to accomplish nearly as much as they can. they have to prioritize. one word that came out in all our interviews, prioritize their second term or they're going to be in big trouble if they try and do everything like gay marriage. that would gum up the works for a long time. >> it strikes me there's going to be two things that will happen probably regardless of how much push the president puts behind it. immigration reform, it seems clear to me republicans have calculated that they need to be part of this process for their own political survival. and the ending or close to ending of the war in afghanistan because it is the executive's purview will happen. the question is what will happen with gun control? do you try to do it with all the components in one bill or things like background checks and you sell them to a kay hagen and say nothing polls at 92%. this is a winner. you can get on board with a 92% issue. and do it piece by piece by piece and see how far you can get. you know, that's a real

legitimate question. a lot of house democrats that i talked to want a comprehensive bill because they worry they'll get a lot of the mental health components but none of the gun-control components. >> mark halperin is in new york. do you have a question for jeff? >> obviously a key player in this is harry reid you've covered for a while. if you think from reid's point of view, what are his priorities? cutting entitlements? immigration? energy? gun control? what -- how do you think he ranks them in terms of importance to him? >> i certainly don't think gun control is at the top of harry reid's list here. i mean, he's from nevada. as we know, obviously he is a hunter himself. it's hard to know exactly what his priorities are, but i would not put gun control on the top of the list. he said yesterday he's going to bring it up for a vote. he indicated he's not going to sort of block this, but that's not his priority. i think immigration is probably one of his priorities. as sam said, there's definitely an impetus for both sides to do this. and if democrats don't push this, republicans will be very suspicious of them because they believe that they just want to hold it out there as a political

issue. >> if they don't push immigration. >> if they don't push immigration. >> and here's the fascinating thing about immigration. i remember talking to salter with the mccain campaign in 2008. and i said, why did you guys go the path you did? mark salter? i said, why don't you go ahead and push a bill where somebody worked here for five years. they could go back to mexico. they could apply. and they could come and have legal status. why didn't you go that route? americans would have supported that. he laughed. he said, because the afl-cio opposed it. and the one senator that was constantly at the forefront of opposing that form of immigration reform was a senator from illinois named barack obama. he carried their water on blocking this pathway to citizenship when he was in the senate. the afl-cio put out a press release yesterday talking about the importance of not compromising on citizenship. so the unions themselves --

there are a lot of cross-currents here. the unions themselves don't want an influx of new workers in america, do they? >> no, they don't. that's one of the reasons this organizing for action, jim messina's full-time job is trying to get the union's in line, but it's going to be hard. it's hard on the democratic side. we're not even talking about the difficulty on the republican side getting it through the house. this is a senate democratic problem. >> so the republicans in the house, in effect, could stare at harry reid's senate and say okay, immigration reform, that's great. you guys pass it. >> say bring it. >> yeah, bring it. gun control, great. you guys pass it, we'll look at it. gay marriage, if you want to nationalize it, go ahead. you guys pass it. we'll look -- i mean, they could do this on every one of the president's top priorities. and chances are good the president's top priorities, as stated today, wouldn't pass the democratic senate. >> i think a lot of them would not. >> that's fascinating. jeff, thank you for being here. and know this. this time next year, the

university of alabama will have passed your cornhuskers and actually won 4 out of 5 national championships. >> i think you're right. >> i was actually grabbed by a cornhusker yesterday over on the senate side. graham said, you guys aren't going to win next year. i guess you guys won 3 out of 4 national championships. >> we did. i was in college at that time. it seems like a long time ago. tommy frazier. >> oh, my gosh. >> ancient history. >> thank you so much. jeff's piece is in "the new york times" today. still ahead, david ignatius and dr. brzezinski and bob woodward along with mika brzezinski. let's get a shot. she has just flown in from the south of france, perfectly coiffed. we can't wait to hear how nice is this time of year. we'll be right back. living with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis

means living with pain. it could also mean living with joint damage. humira, adalimumab, can help treat more than just the pain. for many adults, humira is clinically proven to help relieve pain and stop further joint damage. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal events, such as infections, lymphoma, or other types of cancer, have happened. blood, liver and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure have occurred. before starting humira, your doctor should test you for tb. ask your doctor if you live in or have been to a region

where certain fungal infections are common. tell your doctor if you have had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections or have symptoms such as fever, fatigue, cough, or sores. you should not start humira if you have any kind of infection. ask your rheumatologist about humira, to help relieve your pain and stop further joint damage. sven gets great rewards for his small business! how does this thing work? oh, i like it! [ garth ] sven's small business earns 2% cash back

on every purchase, every day! woo-hoo!!! so that's ten security gators, right? put them on my spark card! why settle for less? testing hot tar... great businesses deserve great rewards! [ male announcer ] the spark business card from capital one. choose unlimited rewards with 2% cash back or double miles on every purchase, every day! what's in your wallet? here's your invoice.

up next, dr. zbigniew brzezinski, bob woodward and david gregory. keep it right here on "morning joe." [ male announcer ] you are a business pro. omnipotent of opportunity. you know how to mix business... with business. and you...rent from national.

because only national lets you choose any car in the aisle. and go. you can even take a full-size or above. and still pay the mid-size price. i could get used to this. [ male announcer ] yes, you could business pro. yes, you could. go national. go like a pro.

in the middle of the night it can be frustrating. it's hard to turn off and go back to sleep. intermezzo is the first and only prescription sleep aid approved for use as needed in the middle of the night when you can't get back to sleep. it's an effective sleep medicine you don't take before bedtime. take it in bed only when you need it and have at least four hours left for sleep. do not take intermezzo if you have had an allergic reaction to drugs containing zolpidem, such as ambien. allergic reactions such as shortness of breath or swelling of your tongue or throat may occur and may be fatal. intermezzo should not be taken if you have taken another sleep medicine at bedtime or in the middle of the night or drank alcohol that day.

do not drive or operate machinery until at least 4 hours after taking intermezzo and you're fully awake. driving, eating, or engaging in other activities while not fully awake without remembering the event the next day have been reported. abnormal behaviors may include aggressiveness, agitation, hallucinations, or confusion. alcohol or taking other medicines that make you sleepy may increase these risks. in depressed patients, worsening of depression, including risk of suicide, may occur. intermezzo, like most sleep medicines, has some risk of dependency. common side effects are headache, nausea, and fatigue. so if you suffer from middle-of-the-night insomnia, ask your doctor about intermezzo and return to sleep again. ♪

♪ and the rockets' red glare ♪ the bombs bursting in air ♪ gave proof through the night ♪ that our flag was still there ♪ welcome back to "morning joe" on this crisp wednesday morning. it is day four of president obama's second term, and we're live here in the nation's capital. >> live. >> joining us on set, pew lighter prize-winning editor of "the washington post," bob woodward, the moderator of "meet the press," david gregory and dr. zbigniew brzezinski who is

the author of strategic vision america and the crisis of global power. seriously? >> fantastic. >> what is going on? why would she do that? >> everybody defended her. last hour you should have been here. >> why -- was she singing or not? >> not on stage. >> that's a problem. >> that's unbelievable. >> she had recorded it the night before. and then -- you know, david gregory, if you're going to be a phony -- >> yeah. >> -- on the biggest stage in the world, beyonce teaches us go all out and rip your earphone out and just get into it. i mean, what can you believe in, david? >> dr. brzezinski asked the question with such innocence, just a second ago, which is why would she do that? and it's a question that i thought, too. beyonce is the biggest -- i mean, she's -- what did david remnick say, in beyonce we trust? >> not anymore. >> when brian williams and i

were on the air that day, brian was making the point, this is such a tough song to do live in those conditions. and evidently -- >> that's why they booked beyonce. >> bingo. >> yeah. >> bingo. >> and to me, it's sort of like -- >> i don't think james taylor was lip-syncing. >> james taylor wasn't lip-syncing. >> just putting that out there. >> it was very sweet and wasn't perfect. >> by the way, you could tell that it was tough for james taylor to sing out there, but you knew it was cold. robert frost couldn't even read a poem. they're tough conditions! >> but what's interesting is how the truth came out. it's the marine band that threw beyonce under the bus and said, we were not playing when she was singing. and then they modified, of course, in good marine form and said oh, well, we can't really comment on it. >> even though we were getting coffee and doughnuts while she was singing. >> they were going through the motions. >> they were pretending. >> like nothing -- she --

>> had anyone checked with obama? >> i was going to say, was the president actually speaking? >> oh, my gosh! >> he was definitely speaking. i mean, that speech, the polarization, the reaction to that speech, so many people loving it, particularly his supporters. a lot of people just saying, well, it was kind of vague. >> a lot of it had to do with the tone, the way he presented it. it was sort of forceful, assertive, almost occasionally angry, and i think that contributed to the reactions. >> yes, but it is a moral speech. i mean, there is a line that has not received much attention, which really struck me where he said, our creed is that the littlest girl born in the bleakest poverty will be able to know she has an equal chance to succeed in the world as anybody else. >> that's a beautiful line. >> that is a wonderful idea. of course, no one knows because

little girls, wherever they're born, have parents who make a giant difference. but you could see, you know, and i think it was not an accident that this father of two little girls used "little girl" rather than "little boy" or "little child" that he really feels that. that is the inner obama. >> he does. and he felt the speech, david gregory, obviously. i was just asking over the past hour, kelly o'donnell, our capitol hill correspondent and mark halperin and others how many of these priorities that the president laid out will actually pass through the democratic senate? let's just pretend that in america, you don't have to pass a bill through the republican house. what's the possibility of kay hagen from north carolina and other conservative-to-moderate democrats passing anything on global warming over the next two years or passing anything on gay marriage over the past two years

or even passing anything on assault weapon control over the next two years? >> you know, and as i talked to democrats on capitol hill on gun policy, they want to do some bills where they can get bipartisan support, where they might even be able to get nra support. the president on guns is saying, look, public opinion's got to change, and then we'll be able to ride that wave if it happens. i think we can't lose sight of one central fact. this president wants economic restoration. that's a legacy. he wants the moment that bill clinton had in 2000, remember at the democratic convention where he strolled in as they were announcing how many jobs were created? >> right. >> that's what president obama wants to leave behind. he wants to be able to spend more on infrastructure to achieve those ends. so i still think that's where all the action is. and i agree with jeff zeleny, there were some pieces of this that were statements where he is politically. and even for the history books. but the nitty gritty, i think, is economic restoration. >> dr. brzezinski, as you know better than anybody, presidents'

best-laid plans often are set to the side when something blows up halfway across the world. it certainly happened in 1979. it's really happened again with this president with an arab spring that seemed promising a year ago but now presents great challenges from syria to egypt all across the region. >> yes, the whole region might explode. that is the real risk. that is the real risk. but i think the israeli elections are very important in that regard. i think the israeli people have shown that they're moderate, that they're intelligent, and that they are very much worried about one fundamental fact. israel has never been as disliked and as isolated historically as it is today. and i think that has sunk in. and i think that's hurt netanyahu, and it gives obama a unique chance. >> for our viewers, by the way, that don't know the israeli elections yesterday, netanyahu will remain prime minister, but he's going to have to actually

create a government with a more centrist party, right? >> a government -- >> that's going to demand negotiations with the palestinians. >> that's right. and you know, i don't expect that we'll have a breakthrough to comprehensive peace so quickly. but it is quite conceivable that the united states, supported by the europeans and most of the world, actually, might be able to fashion an agreement which would be provisionally accepted, both by the israelis and the palestinians, with hamas staying away, objecting, and with the israeli right wing objecting. but there would been an agreement and then the implementati implementation. >> might it not be possible -- i mean, you know so much about this that netanyahu being put kind of in somewhat of a setback in the election will make him more militant to rally the people in the country behind him? >> well, if he does, i think he will then be running the risk of

a growing gap between israel and the united states. and i think most israelis will not accept that. the fact of the matter is, many of them would like to have their cake and eat it, too. have our friendship, but do what they want, which is land. but most of them are sensible enough that perhaps the two are not possible, so you have to pick. and friendship with the united states is fundamental to israel's survival. >> jeffrey goldberg made the point from "the atlantic" and "bloomberg view" that his own reporting rereeling sha the president had said that israel doesn't know what its best interests are after that u.n. vote where they increased settlement activity, so that isolation that dr. brzezinski talks about, i think, is real. certainly within this administration. let's actually head to the hearings with secretary clinton today because today the secretary of state finds herself in the hot seat before a doubleheader of congressional hearings. clinton will face tough questions from house and senate committees about the security lapses in benghazi that led to

the death of four americans including ambassador chris stevens. the senate hearing begins this morning at 9:00. and the house committee will kick off at 2:00 p.m. lawmakers are expected to ask clinton whether or not she knew the benghazi consulate had requested additional security while also pressing the secretary on her actions and whereabouts as the attack was unfolding on september 11th. david gregory, what do you think the key questions or weak spots might be for her? for me it almost seems like it rolled out incorrectly on your show when they put susan rice out there. >> i think those are going to be questions. and i think there will be a lot of attention on that. i actually don't think those are the key questions. i think the key question is about how should the united states operate in this part of the world when it is only committed to a lighter security footprint. we don't want to remake this part of the world in say in places like libya with a massive infusion of american forces.

we want to have a lighter presence but have a diplomatic presence and rely on others including local militia who really didn't step up, rely more on narrow force like the cia. so how do we negotiate that kind of path in states where you have what some people describe as al qaeda 3.0 but getting to make their presence felt, where they may not be able to overtake the government, but they can be a huge problem for any forces there. how do we adequately protect our interests there when we're not willing to go all in? i think that's the key question. >> those are the right policy questions, but the hearings are going to focus on the ancient question, what did she know and when did she know it? yes. it lingers. what is interesting, so many people presented this as a scandal. i kept getting people saying, is this watergate? >> they still are. they still are. >> yeah, they still are. >> i was talking to a senior republican on the house floor during the swearing-in and going around talking basically saying,

what's going on through your heads? i think they found themselves over the past week, but i had a senior republican tell me that benghazi was the issue that the american people would really connect with, dr. brzezinski. i don't think it's that -- i don't think americans are that engaged on the issue. i do think, though, they probably want to know not so much what did the secretary know and when did she know it, but how long had they been requesting additional security, and why didn't they get it? >> i think these are perfectly fair questions asked that way. but i think they were trying to create some sort of notion of deliberate deception, and particularly involving the secretary of state and implicitly the president. they were trying to make big political capital out of it. i think now the atmosphere has somewhat cooled. so my guess is the questioning will be probing, but it's not going to be designed to embarrass or humiliate her. and besides, she's now leaving. she's also had an accident. my guess is it's going to be

more gentile than people expect. >> mika, yesterday on the hill talking to republicans, that's what we heard from republicans on the house side and the senate side. some that are going to be questioning her. saying, in effect, listen, we don't want to go after her aggressively. we just want to know -- >> yeah. >> -- how long had they been asking for additional security, and why didn't they get it, and how can we avoid this in the future? >> the republicans we were talking to were certainly looking forward to asking questions, but there wasn't kind of a fervor there to go after her. they just want to know. mike barnicle has a question from new york. mike. >> dr. brzezinski, the other evening in washington, i was speaking with someone who knows a lot about the middle east. syria, of course, is on the front page. president morsi in egypt, of course, we agreed what's going on in egypt in an ongoing situation. but this person's feeling was that we have an increasingly unstable iraq and that the fear

is that by the middle of the summer, the end of the summer, the entire middle east could be in just a stage of conflagration. it could just erupt, the entire middle east. what are your thoughts? >> well, i think the point -- the general point is well taken. it's a region to which if you set a match, it will explode. it could explode in a variety of ways and for a variety of causes. the syrian conflict, obviously, is creating enormous tensions and the possibility of an eruption. a war with iran would set the region entirely ablaze. the intefadeh in palestinian and israel would be similarly, i think, destabilizing. yes, this is a region which is ready to explode. and this means that we have to be very cautious. and i really don't fault the administration for being cautious on syria. i, for one, frankly do not know what can be done by the united states. and most of the calls for an american intervention such as

flying over it -- i don't know what we would be doing with our aircraft, that doesn't solve the political problems on the ground. there isn't a good solution except one perhaps that is to say some form of international cooperation which we haven't been able to generate yet. that is to say the u.n. security council, particularly chinese and the russians, have to be part of the solution. >> and so the killing just continues on the ground indefinitely, right? >> alas, and do we send in the marines or whatever we send in or we bomb them. >> and we get in the middle of a civil war and, of course, ends badly. and the region erupts. the russians. it seems to me that it's not in the russians' best interests in the long run to continue standing beside a tyrant who seems to me, if the past is prologue, cannot survive this in the long run. >> i think you're right in terms of the interests.

but there is a peculiar aspect, namely putin's personality and personal obsessions. this is a man driven by nostalgia and resentment. he literally hates the fact that the soviet empire collapsed. he wants to recreate it. and he may be calculating that if we get bogged down in iran and in the region, he'll have an opening to crack down on something very important to europe and to us, georgia and as asser b azerbaijan. >> talking about the president needing more engagement, getting into areas where he can have a real impact, what does that look like, do you think, in this second term? whether it's a post-assad syria or certainly israel/palestinian issues or, you know, results of the arab spring? where does he engage, and what does that look like to effect some kind of outcome here? >> you know, i'm kind of mildly

optimistic, but i'm mildly optimistic. i think he's put together potentially a very good team. i think kerry and hagel and brennan and in a curious way now as the presidential adviser, but his very much interest in affairs with a team that's going to focus more on the problems on the ground. that is to say basic fundamental strategic challenges that are confronting us. mrs. clinton was terrific. i like her. i respect her. she was enormously energetic. but she had more of a visionary agenda, global warming, global problems, suffering, injustice, jends jendser gender issues, rheau is rights. >> all extremely important. >> but if we don't deal with the problems confronting us right now, we'll never get to dealing with the big problems in the end. so i am hoping that this new

team will really address serious problems that obama didn't finish addressing. >> the theory of the case for this new team now because the reality is that we're going through a transition into a post-superpower world. we are still a superpow er, but there comes a point where we're not. and if you study obama and look at him, he wants to avoid war at all costs. there's some of the hawk in him and obviously in the drone strikes and adding 30,000 troops to afghanistan, but he wants to avoid war at almost any cost. and -- >> i don't think so. >> you don't think so? >> no. that makes him look almost like a pacifist. i don't think he is a pacifist. he doesn't want a war for trivial reasons. and starting a war with iran, after having been so successful in handling the soviet union, which could have killed 85 million americans in 6 hours. i once had a problem like that

on my hands. we had a problem with china. we had a problem with north korea. you know, the notion which you could start a war because someday the iranians may have a bomb. and netanyahu has been telling us since 1994 that it will be next year, that is trivial. but i think obama knows -- he's realistic that he has to use force, and he did in iraq, he did in afghanistan. >> but he's got more limited vision of how to -- >> yes. and i think that's sensible because you said no more superpowers. if a superpower means that we have the capacity to dictate, yes, that's true. but we're still the major instrument of potential progress in the world if we apply ourselves. >> right. but look at his policy with iran. it is one of prevention. preventing them from getting the bomb. and that, as you well know, is the hardest policy to carry out. >> right. preventing them and if we don't succeed in preventing them, not

in starting a new war which explodes the region, but credibly deterring them. and this is why i'm advocating publicly that we adopt the same position towards the middle east that we have had regarding europe, which we have today regarding japan and south korea. >> so a nuclear umbrella. >> any attack on them threatening them, particularly israel, is like if they attacked us and we'll react accordingly. and i have not the slightest doubt that that will be far more credible that they sense that we may or may not go to war. >> mika? >> i want to hear what that problem you once had on your hands was. >> oh, that's something -- >> it's called the cold war. >> well, the cold war -- there was at one point a problem about the possibility that something was developing that would erupt. and fortunately it didn't. there's not much to talk about. >> there's a lot to talk about. that's a great story, and you've told it publicly, and i think gates has written about it.

>> gates has written about it. >> i can tell you what it is. he got a phone call and was told when he was national security adviser that the soviets had launched missiles, and they were coming to the united states and we had a few minutes to decide whether to launch back. >> that wakes you up. >> that wakes you up in the middle of the night. and you made the decision -- and i'm fascinated by this -- to not wake your wife and three children, that you thought it was -- this was the end. >> in 28 minutes, we'd be gone. no, my job -- >> and they should sleep. >> yes. >> i have several minutes to verify, confirm and so forth before alerting the president. and the procedures were followed. and the russians didn't fire because we're all still here. and nothing happened. >> thank goodness. >> that was the kind of world we lived in. and something similar happened in a different fashion vis-a-vis the russians when reagan had a large exercise in the '80s.

and we alerted the russians, and the russians, given their mentality, they're alerting us that they're having an exercise. they wanted to lull us into thinking nothing would happen, but they were planning to attack us. >> we had a little bit of this conversation on "meet the press" on sunday. essentially, what are the limits of american power and influence right now against some of these problems? because you can be critical and say, look, the united states should have kept mubarak in power, could have prevented the arab spring. that may be heavily debated. but the reality is, there are real choices that have to be made. the interesting part of, i think, the president's second term is that he spent that first term saying america, we're going to come home. we are going to focus inward. we are going to project american power in more narrow ways whether it's afghanistan, the use of special forces and drones to prosecute a war against terrorists, and now he has to make a decision, having ended those wars or in the process of ending the afghanistan war, how

to use american influence, how to define national security. >> we are moving past -- and again, going back to our meetings on the hill yesterday and what i've heard from republicans for some time behind closed doors, we are soon going to be moving beyond the neoconservative phase of the republican party as far as foreign policy goes. most republicans in the senate and the house, like the american people, are exhausted by 10, 11, 12 years of war. obviously, john mccain and lindsey graham are on the forefront and have shaped republican foreign policy for a few years. certainly john mccain has. he is in a shrinking minority. and it's shrinking very quickly. and i suspect you're going to see a return to the realism of colin powell of dr. brzezinski, of brent scowcroft, of george h.w. bush, of the republicans

who helped us and democrats who helped us through that approach when the cold war. >> and this is the post-superpower era, where there has to be some pulling back, and david said it exactly right. >> i wouldn't say post-superpower. you're right, it's a new era. it's much more indirection in our application of power. the neocons are for direct use of power. this will have to be more indirect. >> and there may be surprises there, as always is the case. look at what happened with algeria and mali. >> dr. zbigniew brzezinski, dad, thanks for not waking me up, by the way. >> in "the hill." >> yes, in "the hill." you would have been obliterated. david gregory, thank you very much. bob woodward, stay with us if you can. we'll be right back with senators amy klobuchar and jeff blake. also, terry francona joins us to discuss his new memoir about his years with the red sox. you're watching "morning joe"

brewed by starbucks. ♪ ♪ [ multiple sounds making melodic tune ] ♪ [ male announcer ] at northrop grumman, every innovation, every solution, comes together for a single purpose -- to make the world a safer place. that's the value of performance. northrop grumman. i hate getting up in the morning. i love bread. i love cheese. did i say i love chocolate? i'm human! and the new weight watchers 360 program lets me be. the reason i'm still in this body feelin' so good isn't because i never go out and enjoy the extra large, extra cheese world we live in.

it's because i do. and you can too. because when a weight loss program is built for human nature you can expect amazing. introducing the new weight watchers 360 program. join for free and expect amazing. because it works. [ male announcer ] the exclusive air suspension in the 2013 ram 1500. ♪ engineered to move heaven and earth. ♪ guts. glory. ram. the new ram 1500. motor trend's 2013 truck of the year.

♪ great god of king >> boom! the woman's got game. either way, it's still better than what we would have had if romney won. ♪ and crown thy good ♪ from sea to shining sea, yeah ♪ >> nailed it. >> that is true. that would have been a little

awkward. at 29 past the hour, welcome back to "morning joe." here with us now, republican senator from arizona, senator jeff flake. and democratic senator from minnesota, senator amy klobuc r klobuchar. good to have you both back on the show. joe will be here in a second, talking to my dad, can't get over that story. and i am glad he didn't wake me up. what an incredible -- >> living on the edge. >> can you imagine? >> because they had a black book that listed options if the missiles are coming in, do we attack in the soviet union? military targets? economic targets? leadership targets? and it was a menu that if this occurred, the president would have to say, let's hit here and here and not here. >> he only told me that story recently on a mountaintop in maine. and i mean, it was very windy. and everything went silent as he told it because it was so absolutely gripping. and i was just -- i think about 10 or 11. okay. so let's get to what we're

looking at today. and jeff flake, you're going to be at the hearings at 9:00 a.m., so you're headed straight to the hill after your "morning joe" hit to face hillary clinton on the benghazi attacks. >> right. >> what do you plan to ask her? what are you hoping to hear? >> well, a couple things. i think david gregory mentioned in your last segment that, you know, how do we plan to have security in an area where we have a light footprint like this? what are we going to do moving forward? it's not going to get better. i think -- at least for a while. and so we've got to look at lessons learned. and two, there's still lingering questions out there that a lot of people want answered as to why susan rice was deputized or the one put forward to go and state the administration's position on this. and i assume she'll get some questions on that. >> and the questions you have, do you feel they've been avoided? i mean, what is -- i guess i'd like to understand what your angle is. >> i wouldn't say that, but we've not had the secretary of state answer them.

she's the one that most people are looking to for answers here with regard to the state department and their involvement. so i think it will be good to have her speak. >> do you think it's a scandal where there is concealment and cover-up and deception? >> you know, i wouldn't put it that way. certainly it could have been handled a lot better. and when you look at the documents and cables going between the government agencies, there were people who knew more than they let on about the situation and about what fostered these attacks. and so i think that there are legitimate questions that need to be asked there. >> and bob, this is, at the end of the day, politics. let's not -- first of all, let's not act shocked as republicans that a white house would try to fudge the truth around a foreign policy issue for political reasons. republicans have done it in the middle of campaigns. democrats have done it in the middle of campaigns.

and here this cut against a narrative that al qaeda was destroyed. they were withered when they were responsible for killing a u.s. ambassador. >> it was before the election, and the white house was concerned, oh, this is going to cascade into some major event. and when you look at the documents, i've looked at some of them. i'm sure you've looked at many more. just an inconsistent policy. they wanted to lowball it and not have a lot of security there. and all the information was, it's a dangerous area. >> senator klobuchar, you're working -- now let's move to immigration -- with marco rubio on a plan that you want to put forward. tell us about it. >> well, there are a number of plans going on right now, and i think it's actually an exciting opportunity for bipartisan work. one of the things that a group of us is working on is the h1v visa issue, and this is scientists, engineers, people

who are really literally banned from our country. sometimes they get trained in our country, and then we literally send them off to start the next high-tech company or the next google in india or someplace else. it gives us the opportunity -- >> he always says when somebody gets an mba, we should staple a green card on the back of it because they go back, let's say, to new delhi and they create an i.t. company that hires 2,000 people there instead of 2,000 people in north carolina. it's lunacy. >> this country was built with immigrants with their ideas and inventions. one of them starts an invention and then they hire tons of other people. >> senator, you agree with that, right? >> they're letting canada do this. they have opened it up and we need to open it up here. >> i introduced what's called the staple act. you hear that from high-tech titans and others all the time. staple a green card to their diploma. we've been working on this kind of thing for a long time.

>> what's been the holdup here? we want the breaest and the brightest to come here. >> my first two years, and i think president bush was really trying to get it done. he was legitimately trying to get it done. there was such a pushback from radio shows and talk shows. and now is the time to do it again. >> what is the hardest part of the immigration bill if. >> first of all, i think we need to do more than just this. we need to do the dream act and agriculture jobs and earned path to citizenship and a lot of other people including orrin hatch have been working on our piece, which is the high-tech and engineers. we have to do it together. and i think with the economy, as difficult as it's been and fragile in the last few years, it was hard to take this on. now things are stable and it's time to move on and see this as a way to build a competitive agenda. >> will the afl-cio and other unions that have opposed a path to citizenship in the past, will the president be able to drag the unions along? >> i'm comfortable we'll be able

to come together. you've seen so much bipartisanship. senator schumer is leading a group that senator flake is part of. i think we can get this done. >> jeff, can the president drag the unions along to get them supporting real immigration reform? >> remember, in the last four years, we haven't had a comprehensive plan put forward because the unions don't want guest worker plan or temporary -- >> why not? they just don't want more workers in the workplace? >> i believe on the high-tech side, there's some in my party that say let's not have any new. >> thank god we didn't have that in world war ii where einstein ended up in austria. >> my own view is if they're willing to come here or stay here after they've received a ph.d. from our universities, roll out the red carpet and don't try to count that against other visas that have been offered. >> think about the best and the brightest in this country. think about the high-tech

companies in this country that have revolutionized the way we live, the way we work, whether you're talking about yahoo! or google or intel, go tech company after tech company after tech company. >> there are companies in minnesota trying to get a worker over. they can't. then they have to put their work overseas. so to have these people come, use some of those visa fees to pay for stem education for our own students, i think this could be a really positive for our country. >> don't you think that the republican party has pivoted on this issue, and the real question is what's it like working with senator rubio? >> well, again, this is a group effort with senator hatch and senator coons, others. i think it's been very positive. i think senator rubio and others are working with us to try to move this forward. and i think that's what we need to do across the board on debt reduction, on a budget and everything else. this is a new year, and we have to start new and think anew as abraham lincoln said. >> work together. >> i want to ask about how many

of those things the president talked about in his inaugural speech. harry reid can get through the democratic senate. forget the republican house. >> three months. >> three months for? >> to be back to talk about where we are on all these things. >> all right. >> there's also the state of the union. don't worry. >> oh, yeah. >> senator amy klobuchar. >> let's think anew. let us begin anew. >> senator jeff flake, thank you both. good luck with everything. >> amy, great to see you, too. still ahead, "washington post" columnist david ignatius and abc news' cokie roberts. plus, former red sox manager terry francona who's opening up about the highs and lows surrounding his tenure in boston. keep it right here on "morning joe." [ male announcer ] this is bob,

a regular guy with an irregular heartbeat. the usual, bob? not today. [ male announcer ] bob has afib: atrial fibrillation not caused by a heart valve problem, a condition that puts him at greater risk for a stroke. [ gps ] turn left. i don't think so. [ male announcer ] for years, bob took warfarin, and made a monthly trip to the clinic to get his blood tested. but not anymore. bob's doctor recommended a different option: once-a-day xarelto®. xarelto® is the first and only once-a-day prescription blood thinner for patients with afib not caused by a heart valve problem, that doesn't require routine blood monitoring. like warfarin, xarelto® is proven effective to reduce the risk of an afib-related stroke. there is limited data on how these drugs compare when warfarin is well managed. no routine blood monitoring means bob can spend his extra time however he likes.

new zealand! xarelto® is just one pill a day, taken with the evening meal. and with no dietary restrictions, bob can eat the healthy foods he likes. do not stop taking xarelto® rivaroxaban without talking to the doctor who prescribes it for you. stopping may increase your risk of having a stroke. get medical help right away if you develop any signs or symptoms of bleeding, like unusual bruising or tingling. you may have a higher risk of bleeding if you take xarelto® with aspirin products, nsaids or blood thinners. talk to your doctor before taking xarelto® if you currently have abnormal bleeding. xarelto® can cause bleeding, which can be serious, and rarely may lead to death. you are likely to bruise more easily on xarelto®, and it may take longer for bleeding to stop. tell your doctors you are taking xarelto® before any planned medical or dental procedures. before starting xarelto®, tell your doctor about any conditions, such as kidney, liver or bleeding problems. ready to change your routine? ask your doctor about once-a-day xarelto®.

for more information including cost support options, call 1-888-xarelto or visit goxarelto.com.

renaissance man, terry francona. he writes, he played basketball, manages baseball. now we're going to see if he can talk about it when "morning joe" continues.

meet the 5-passenger ford c-max hybrid. when you're carrying a lot of weight, c-max has a nice little trait, you see, c-max helps you load your freight, with its foot-activated lift gate. but that's not all you'll see, cause c-max also beats prius v, with better mpg. say hi to the all-new 47 combined mpg c-max hybrid. every signature is unique, and every fingerprint unrepeatable. at sleep number, we recognize the incredible

diversity of human beings, and know that up there with your social security number and your phone number is another important number. your sleep number. so we created the extraordinarily comfortable sleep number experience. it's a collection of innovations designed around a bed with dualair technology that allows you to adjust to the support your body needs - each of your bodies. it begins every time one of our sleep professionals rejects the notion of the mass-produced human, and helps another person find their sleep number setting. find yours. exclusively at a sleep number store. sleep number. comfort individualized. queen mattresses start at just $699. and save $500 on our special edition bed set. now at the sleep number white sale.

executor of efficiency. you can spot an amateur from a mile away... while going shoeless and metal-free in seconds. and you...rent from national. because only national lets you choose any car in the aisle...and go. you can even take a full-size or above, and still pay the mid-size price. now this...will work. [ male announcer ] just like you, business pro. just like you. go national. go like a pro.

i'm going to talk about how horrific it is. this really is as bad as last night and last month, as bad as any month in red sox nation history. >> it was watching a prolonged train wreck. >> literally one minute, the red sox lose. one minute later, the ball goes over the left field fence. barnicle and i were texting back and forth. and all i said, i sent a one-word text to him, "unspeakable." and he sent back a text about carl crawford. i can't quote what it said. and then i said something else like, this is just the worst thing ever. but then barnicle said, which shows you the difference between now and '04. >> right. >> he said, on the bright side -- i'm, like, what bright side! he said, the greatest night in the history of major league baseball in a regular season. >> okay. >> it didn't seem great to me. >> no, it was a hard time.

our red sox fans here on the "morning joe" set in washington and in new york didn't take the season-ending loss back in 2011 too well. it hurt. because we love them. >> it was painful because you know what, though? i thought it was fascinating that terry francona got dumped on. >> yeah. >> during that time. and then at the beginning of the new season, a new manager comes in. and within two days, they're dumping on him, too. maybe it wasn't about the managers. >> maybe not. >> maybe this was about the guys that weren't doing what they should have done on the baseball field! >> joining us now -- >> i'm still mad at them! >> you're still sorry. i'm sorry i brought it up. joining us now, the manager of that team and the current manager of the cleveland indians, terry francona. he is the co-author of the new book "francona: the red sox years." oh, my. that should be good. >> coach, nice to have you here.

let's pass it over to mike barnicle. >> tito, there's a lot in the book. it's a terrific read. let me ask you, one of the points of contention is your relationship toward the end of your stay in boston with the owners of the red sox, that they were guys who didn't really love baseball. they liked baseball. but they didn't love baseball. but these were the same owners in 2004 and 2007, in those two years when you came back with world series rings, were they happy then? did they love baseball then? >> you know what? i think i put, to put it in perspective a little bit, we went year to year when we wrote the book, and i knew all along when we got to '11 we were going to have to deal with that. because the way it ended, it was very public. it was hurtful. and i'm sure part of that came out. and what i did write in that part where i say, they like baseball but they don't love it, i also have said they've always been very good owners. i always believed that, too. >> the way it ended, were you

fired? did they tell you to get out? was it a mutual thing? >> i don't know that i really have a good answer. to this day i probably don't know. it's not all on ownership. i had feelings where i thought maybe my shelf life there was coming to a close. i had told them in the meeting that my ability to reach some players, i thought -- i was frustrated with myself. i never said i lost control of the clubhouse. i just didn't think the words i was saying was rez naturing the way resonating the way it needed to. >> in other words, does that happen? >> yes. yeah. and it hadn't happened to me here, but i felt it. i mean, once i had a meeting in toronto. because it was the early part of september. and i wasn't comfortable with what i was -- some of the stuff i was seeing. and i remember after the meeting -- >> like what? >> just guys were worried too much about things we couldn't control. and i know that's an old cliche, but i was seeing a lot of it.

and in our game, you know, and you've been around me long enough to know, i want our guys to care about each other fiercely. that's why the '04 team worked so well. we didn't have a ton of rules. but when the game started, they knew what they were doing and they cared about each other. and i saw stuff that i didn't think gave saw stuff that i did think gave us their best chance to win and i wanted to tell them that. and i walked back to my office, and said, they didn't grasp it, they didn't listen. they were just wondering why i had a meeting. >> this book calls mike barnicle a boston multi-media personality. that's questionable. >> we had to give him some liberty. >> so there are great baseball fans all over the country, but boston is special. red sox nation is different. what are the fans like? what is the pressure like for a manager in boston that's not like any place else? >> if you like baseball, it's an unbelievable place to work. there's passion, there's interest. along with that comes a headache every once in a while. because there's no little story.

and i found that out in a hurry. so you have to -- i think you have to recognize that as a manager there, and you do have to manage a little bit different. sometimes, it's just trying to make it easier for the players to play the game and be a little bit of a shield for them. >> you know, one of the points of contention, one of the few points of contention in the book is the quote, attributed to theo epstein, about marketing people brought in to take a look at the team and the demand, find more sexy players. and a lot of people think that that was directed to the owners. but apparently, theo says it was directed to the marketing people. that quote was meant for the marketing people. now you've got one of the owners, tom warner out there, who's a terrific guy, thinking that there's a lot of abuse pointed at him in the book. tell me about you and tom warner. >> i don't think that, if you read the book, and put it in a perspective, it was never meant to be an owner-bashing book. i tried to be honest, at least how i viewed it.

and i think -- i mean, that's how i feel, is what we wrote. that part of it, what you just talked about, i was never even brought into that when i was there. those are things that i found out afterwards. theo was really good about sheltering me from things like that. because he knew it wasn't going to help, and it would just frustrate me. >> so we love tony werner, right? >> everybody -- again, i didn't have a bad relationship with the owners, at all. when it ended, what i wanted them to do was care a little bit more about me, because what happened afterwards, i thought, was below the belt. i didn't think it was them. i just thought it was below the belt. and i thought the couple times i talked to them, when you say you're going to call somebody back, just call back. so i was disappointed. >> cleveland, though, this year? you going to be okay? going to be good? >> i hope so. that's the idea. >> carlos santana, going to be good? >> he better be. i don't want to be an analyst next year. >> terry francona, one of the greats.

your memoir, "francona: the red sox years." thanks for dropping by. >> appreciate it. coming up tomorrow, john elway is going to be right here on the show. you're watching "morning joe," brewed by starbucks. i moved here from russia and i gained weight because the portions were much larger. and i just felt like i needed to eat it all because it was so yummy. weight watchers online worked for me because it lets me live my life. i can still go out with my friends. i can still enjoy my favorite foods and drinks. it's just a smarter way of eating. i lost 40 lbs. wow it's amazing. my most favorite part of my new body is my bottom. [ laughs ] [ hudson ] weight watchers online. the power of weight watchers completely online. join for free today.

let's say you pay your guy around 2% to manage your money. that's not much you think. except it's 2% every year. does that make a difference? search "cost of financial advisors" ouch. over time it really adds up. then go to e-trade and find out how much our advice costs. spoiler alert: it's low. really? yes, really. e-trade offers investment advice and guidance from dedicated, professional financial consultants. it's guidance on your terms, not ours. that's how our system works. e-trade. less for us. more for you.

you might want to make a note of this. on sunday, at "meet the press," david gregory will have an exclusive interview with the chairman of the house budget committee, congressman paul ryan. that's on your local nbc station. up next, here on "morning joe," beyonce doesn't miss a beat during her inaugural performance on monday. turns out a tape recorder may have been doing the work. that's next on "morning joe." ♪ [ construction sounds ] ♪ [ watch ticking ] [ engine revs ] come in. ♪ got the coffee. that was fast. we're outta here. ♪ [ engine revs ] ♪

thor gets great rewards for his small business! your boa! [ garth ] thor's small business earns double miles on every purchase, every day! ahh, the new fabrics. put it on my spark card. ow. [ garth ] why settle for less? the spiked heels are working. wait! [ garth ] great businesses deserve great rewards. [ male announcer ] the spark business card from capital one. choose unlimited rewards with double miles or 2% cash back on every purchase, every day! what's in your wallet? [ cheers and applause ]

you may be muddling through allergies. try zyrtec-d®. powerful relief of nasal congestion and other allergy symptoms -- all in one pill. zyrtec-d®. at the pharmacy counter.

visit washington dc every year. some come to witness... some to be heard. we come to make an impact. to learn from leaders... and to lead others. to create... and create change. we are the george washington university... we come to make history. ♪ and the rockets' red glare

♪ the bombs bursting in air ♪ gave proof through the night good morning. it's 8:00 a.m. on the east coast, 5:00 a.m. on the west coast, as you take a live look at washington, d.c. and back with us on set, in washington, kelly o'donnell, michael steele, and sam stein. and up in new york, mark halperin and mike barnicle. sam, if i said the words milly-vanilly and put that together, you wouldn't know what i was talking about, right? >> blame it on the rain. >> that's pretty good. halperin, come on, this is huge! i mean, beyonce -- you're fine with it? it's okay -- >> it's performance, it's just

performance. >> she's still singing. >> also, you know what? she looked great, she had a lot of electricity. >> what does that have to do with anything? sing the song! >> here's my question. the marine band said they did not have time to rehearse. and i worked the weekend i was on the hill, kelly clarkson rehearsed, other people rehearsed. i'm a huge beyonce fan, if you're going to sing at the inauguration, how do you not have time to rehearse. >> it's the biggest stage in the world. you've got to put it out there live. it's not a big deal, but i think a lot of people were disappointed that she, in the moment, it wasn't her voice. >> you know, obama was lip syncing too during -- >> well, the last four years. >> mike barnicle's laughing about this. "star-spangled scam." all right, mike barnicle. i guess, you know, mika is deeply offended by this, and when she jets in from the south of france on her real jet, she'll tell us about it.

but mike, you're nonplussed by this as well, are you? >> oh, yeah. you know, beyonce is great. so what, we could have had the cows still singing and no one would have known the difference, i guess. but it's no big deal. no big deal. >> all right. well, no big deal -- >> we lip synced the last half of monday's show, joe, because we were all -- >> you could tell. >> don't you feel bad for her, that here she is, this international superstar, great moment, and now people are making fun of her. that's a shame. it would have been worth it to just take the chance and sing it live. >> we just wanted to believe. >> you know, james taylor, james taylor sang it live. >> allegedly. >> he did. >> no, he's j.t.. >> maybe she had a cold or something. maybe there'll be an explanation. >> she should have listened to bill o'reilly. >> i don't even know what that -- >> do it live! with that happy note, today republicans in the house are

expected to vote on a plan that's going to diffuse the debt ceiling crisis, at least temporarily. republicans are planning to offer legislation that will suspend the enforcement of the federal debt limit for at least three months, allowing the government to keep borrowing money to pay for all its current obligations. in exchange, the house gopers want the democratic-controlled senate to do something that they haven't done in 1,365 days -- pass a budget. something that body hasn't done since 2009. now, instead of demanding spending cuts, republicans have added a provision to the bill that would suspend lawmakers' own paychecks if their chamber fails to pass a budget by april 15th. that's a lot like, actually, the no labels, no budget, no pay plan that that organization's been dealing, talking about for a long time. michael steele, i think that's a great idea. >> i do too. >> if you don't do your job, and the democrats in the senate haven't done their job in 1,365

days, why pay them? >> i don't think you should. in fact, if it had my way, it would be retro, so i would take back the money we paid you over the last four years for not doing your job. but that, again, some people would say, that's a political ploy or tactic. the reality of it is, it does reflect where congress is right now, and i think it will work for a lot of people to say, yeah, we're going to pay you, then do your job. i think this is a good move and we'll see how they respond. >> you know, kelly, neither republicans nor democrats have been allowed to do their job on the hill for a very long time. i know you hear this all the time, and it's one of the -- it's really one of the things that unites, at least, 95% of the members. they're sick and tired of getting elected to go up to washington, do their jobs, sit on committees, work through bills that come through their committees. and then take those bills to the house floor and the senate floor, vote on them, then go to conference. i joked before, it was a lot like, you know, i'm just a bill. "schoolhouse rock." that doesn't happen anymore.

americans don't realize that you always end up with a couple of people behind closed doors, in the back of -- we were on the hill yesterday. i heard this complaint from republicans, from democrats, from senators, from congressmen and congresswomen. they all say the same thing. we don't get to do our jobs. we come up here, and at the end, it's always the president and john boehner in a back room. and we just sit around. >> so much of the disillusionment you hear from members who did come to the body, thinking they're going to be able to make a difference is exactly what you're talking about. and so much of the infighting is really not so much between the parties, while there's plenty of that, there is such a frustration between house and senate. they openly knock each other in the hallways, because they operate differently. and we have this whole sort of filibuster budget going on in the senate, the rules and how things get through. and on the house side, over and over again, there's this weary sense of, they've passed some

things, they may not be popular everywhere, but they did pass a budget. so what they're trying to do with this no budget, no pay, is to sort of turn up the screws on the senate. and so republicans, hoping to not get the blame for some of these fights, are trying to focus a light on the senate not passing a budget, which most people don't even realize has happened. >> i get your point, though. it's got to be frustrating to see the big issues, the big debates get involved in this backroom brinksmanship. >> with absolutely no transparency. >> and it used to be committees would have a lot of jurisdiction over the appropriations in their subset. now we have a budget process which, let's put aside the budget itself for a second, the appropriations process is broken down too. and we're just doing things by cr, continuing resolution. so, basically, you've given power to a few very powerful congressmen. and all the other members are sitting there, waiting to be told what to vote for. it's very frustrating. >> mark halperin, it is frustrating, and this has been going on for some time. and it's really dangerous for a democracy when you have two bodies, and actually, one run by

a democrat, the other run by a republican, who operate with a handful of people running the entire show, where 90%, 95% of the representatives and the senators don't have a say in the big deals, because the staffs of a couple of leaders go into the back rooms, they go behind closed doors, they emerge with a deal, and then tell the members, you have to vote up or down on this. you have -- this isn't going to committee. >> and you have two days. >> there are no amendments. we're not going to give you time to read these bills. and oh, yeah, by the way, they involve billions and billions of dollars. >> joe, you're going to remember whose line it is, the democratic speaker of the house says to his colleagues, the republicans are the opposition, but the senate is the enemy. the gap between the two chambers is pretty big. what's exciting to me now, and interesting to me, is that public opinion may start to

matter. the president, we've talked about, starting this new organization, organizing for action, to try to get public opinion to influence what goes on on capitol hill. to take an outside game and exhale influence the inside game. what speaker boehner's doing with this proposal on pay, overwhelmingly, i bet you, the american people support the notion they shouldn't get paid if they can't do their job. the question is, will the senate, will harry reid, will mitch mcconnell, will they actually feel either based on the efforts of the house, or what the president does, will they actually feel, hey, we need to listen to what the country wants. there's still populism out there, particularly with the economy bad, and people feeling like washington needs to get its act together. >> so, hey, joe? >> yeah. >> that leads me to ask, you know, the group, what happens if within the white house, off of what mark just said, because this will be increasingly popular if the republicans continue to do things like this, what happens if the white house decides to try and pick off specific members of the

republican membership in the house and perhaps some republicans in the senate and basically say to them, see, people like you more now, if you come and try to meet us halfway. what happens to this whole ball game if that occurs? >> actually, i think the ball game's changing the front of "the washington post" says that the gop offers respite on debt. "the new york times" also talks about how the republicans have gone ahead and pushed forward, obviously, for this three-month extension that we're talking about. and mike, this goes back again to the republican party not being conservative, not being moderate, but being smart, going back on their stupid ways, where they set themselves up as punching bags, which they've done time and time again through the years. again, i think this three-month move last week, that they made, i think it's a very shrewd move. it's one of the first shrewd moves i've seen the body do in quite some time. i've seen republicans do in some

time. and we were -- mika and i were up on the hill all yesterday afternoon, and i've got to say, the republicans i spoke with give me hope. and michael, they didn't give me hope, because they said we're going to compromise, because you know, actually, this is the great irony, you know, people are always, oh, scarborough, i don't want them to compromise on spending cuts. >> right. >> in fact, i want them to cut more than they will cut. i want them to go further on medicare, i want them to go further on social security. i want them to go further on the middle class entitlements in the out years, not now. i don't want any seniors to be hurt now. but in the out years, where it really explodes, i want them to be more aggressive on tax reform. i want them to cut defense spending much more. i hope the sequestration goes through. >> right. >> i want those defense cuts. and after we do those defense cuts, we need more defense cuts. we need to stop occupying countries for a decade at a time. we've got to stop spending $2

billion a week. i am mr. cut. call me mr. cut! i am more conservative than most republicans on the hill. that said, what gave me comfort yesterday was, i talked to party leaders and i talked to the rank and file on both sides, and they seemed to understand that they've walked into traps, time and time again, and they're ready to start playing smart. that's good. >> that's very good. and i think they've had, you know, to your point, joe, "cut man scarborough," they understand that you can have the arguments all day long on cutting and spending, but if you consistently fall into the president's traps on the social issues and on a bunch of other things out there that distract from the main argument you want to make about the growth and health of the economy, then you're going nowhere. and i think they're now beginning to realize that.

and i think the inaugural speech kind of put that in reference for them, in perspective for them, in a sense that the president pretty much said, you know, what, yeah, not only did we win in '08, we won again. and now we're going to do it my way. and i think that for a lot of them, they realize, wow, they've got a lot of momentum behind them. the president's got that kind of energy. now we need to play ball. and how they play ball in the next few weeks, in this window we talk about, joe, gives them the room they need to really drill down on a message, a corps message. pretty much in line with what you're talking about, a fiscal conservative message about cutting the growth, the size, the spending that government is currently engaged in, to protect those very programs that the left is so hunkered down on and so concerned about for outyear and for future generations. >> the thing is, the president, if he wants to pass a sweeping bill on global warm welcome if he wants to go after cap and trade again, that's very easy. you can say, if you're john boehner, well, that's fantastic.

>> right. >> democrats, this is a democratic -- this is a democratic plan. you guys want it. it's a priority for you. guess what, you control the senate. you guys pass global warming legislation in the senate, then we'll look at it in the house. gay marriage, fantastic. we are open to whatever you pass. that's your top priority. great. why don't you guys in the senate pass it. and then we'll look at it. and you can do the same thing with gun control. actually an issue that matters a great deal to me. actually, not gun control, but assault weapons control. but, again, do what they did before. pass that in the senate. and let them do that, and say, i'll tell you what we're going to focus on. we're going to focus on the house, on getting people back to work, saving entitlement programs, and taking care of the crushing debt. and making the tax code simpler, making tax coat fairer. we're going to take care of the meat and potatoes issues over

here. we're going to take care of making social security stronger. you guys pass your global warming plan over there. we're going to focus on getting americans back to work. go ahead, handle all the social issues -- >> what's interesting, what you're outlining, and i think it's probably a smart play for the republicans, is a reversal of the two chambers. usually it's the senate that's the cooling saucer for legislation. >> right. >> you're saying, let's let the house being the cooling saucer for democratic-sponsored legislation, focus on spending stuff in its own time. >> but the president, sam, laid those out as democratic priorities. >> yeah, sure. >> in his inauguration, he said, these are my top priorities. and that's great. the fantastic thing is for the president, he's got harry reid running the democratic senate, so let them run the president's priorities through there, and republicans that control the house can focus on getting people back the work, saving social security, and reforming the tax code. >> and i think to that point, what we're talking about earlier, one of the things that republicans need to be doing

more of now, sort of looking at things in the long-term or long game perspective, as opposed to the short-term or short game perspective. and they realize they don't control evidence. and it's going to be very difficult for them to pass what they want to pass, but they can get some of it done. and they just have to get times

the epa head, who was leaving that job, but he outlined -- >> a wonderful, wonderful person. but my question is, why would senator inhofe miss her, because he hasn't been really nice. >> he said because she has told him the truth in hearings. >> oh, that's great. which is a true compliment. but getting something to move on that would be very difficult. harry reid is saying that it will be patty murray, in charge of the budget, to try to deal with some of these others -- >> but i'm focused -- so the president -- one of the president's top priorities is global warming, and you're saying that's probably not going to pass through a democratic senate. what about gay marriage? what about gay marriage bills? what's the likelihood? this is another top priority for the president, the president has a democratic senate. what's the likelihood of the

democratic senate under the leadership of harry reid -- >> do you see anybody moving -- >> i'm just asking -- you don't think so? >> there's a bill for constitutional rights for gay marriage. that's not going anywhere. everybody's waiting on the supreme court for gay marriage. >> when we come back, our political roundtable with "the washington post's" david ignatius. we're going to ask him about his controversial op-ed yesterday, where he said the president's speech was pedestrian. also, abc news' cokie roberts and chairman of the mississippi republican party, joe nassef. but first, here's bill karins with a check on the weather. >> this will be the coldest week soft winter for a lot of people. really cold air going over the warm water, just classic lake-effect snows and over a foot of it in areas, just outside of syracuse and especially near erie, pennsylvania, where these pictures are c s are coming fr.

it's snowing there again today. going to focus on our friends in northern new england. we're complaining in new york and d.c. about minus 2 and 7. burlington, vermont, this morning, minus 28. caribou at minus 26. i mean, that's colder than even fargo and duluth this morning. so you get the picture. now, this is kind of isolated, actually. much of the southern half of the nation and all of the west is actually looking at very warm conditions. it could be 67 degrees today in denver, 70 in dallas, and 70 in miami. so not everyone is dealing with this really frigid pattern. and by the time we get to next week, so in other words, if you can survive one week of this, we're going to warm it up next week and we'll start to see temperatures almost what they were before, which was above average. but today, it's just brutally cold, windchills are making it feel even worse. snow showers by the great lakes. minneapolis, still brutally cold. and our friends on the west coast, actually some rain for you today, especially north of san francisco in northern california. but dallas, denver, a little

jealous today. new york city, coldest morning we've seen in a couple years with that windchill. you're watching "morning joe," brewed by starbucks. [ woman ] ring. ring. progresso. your soups are so awesomely delicious my husband and i can't stop eating 'em! what's...that... on your head? can curlers! tomato basil, potato with bacon... we've got a lot of empty cans. [ male announcer ] progresso. you gotta taste this soup. sven gets great rewards for his small business! how does this thing work? oh, i like it! [ garth ] sven's small business earns 2% cash back on every purchase, every day! woo-hoo!!! so that's ten security gators, right? put them on my spark card! why settle for less? testing hot tar... great businesses deserve great rewards! [ male announcer ] the spark business card from capital one. choose unlimited rewards with 2% cash back

or double miles on every purchase, every day! what's in your wallet? here's your invoice.

it was a very bizarre, disordered priority of what our national interests were. where was the debt? where was the deficit? where was the unemployment? where was the issue of poverty in america, which is increased under his watch?

where is the hopelessness? >> yeah, where was the hopelessness? that's what the american public wants! i mean, have we -- have we forgotten fdr's famous inaugural, when he proclaimed, "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself." and also a second depression, rampant starvation, and my gut's telling me that europe's a tenderbox. ahh, what's the point? we're all doomed! i can't walk! i can't walk! >> welcome back to "morning joe." it is 24 past the hour. joining the table here in washington, associate editor and columnist for "the washington post," david ignatius, political commentator for abc news and contributor to npr, cokie roberts, and the chairman of the mississippi republican party, joe nassef. michael steele still with us as well. okay. a lot to talk about. you did not like the president's

inaugural speech. we're going to get there. i'm going to read a portion of what you wrote. it's just stinging! but first, cokie, this is not -- you were covering the inauguration all day for abc, i take it? >> right, right. >> but it's not your first inauguration. >> no, certainly not. far from that. >> you brought a picture from -- >> from 1949. i had turned 5 three weeks before. >> look at her! >> that is the truman inaugural. i had a good seat on somebody's shoulders. not my mother's, because there's another picture of her with my brother and sister. so some kind person put me up on their shoulders and there we are. that's in front of the house and truman was, of course, in front of the main portico of the east portico of the capital, which was where inaugurations were for most of the 19th and 20th centuries, until ronald reagan had the good sense to take a hollywood look and say, wait! the west front of the capitol is a far better spot. >> the lighting. that is the cutest thing i've ever seen. >> thank you.

>> you look definitely like you. >> just like me. >> okay, so david, i'm going to make a correction, though. because i read this the other day to a group on the set who went, oh, ouch. but you say, a flat, partisan, and pedestrian speech. and the first thing you say is, "the only voice that really soared at midday was beyonce's," and now we know that wasn't soaring either. she was lip syncing. >> maybe that's the secret, we need more lip syncing. >> i'm sorry, i don't get it. the spokesmodel for pepsi couldn't bear to be less than perfect, so she lip syncs? >> the great thing, if she was lip syncing, was to rip the earpiece out of her ear, as if it's totally live, just sing out. >> i would rather be real and a little imperfect. i don't know what the -- i don't get it. i don't get it. >> "the star-spangled banner" is

really hard. >> but that's why she was booked, cokie. they didn't book me. >> next year, maybe. you'll be there and do it imperfectly. >> so she's really not singing here, guys? look at this. >> she looks like she's singing to me. >> she's got that microphone mighty close to her mouth. >> back to the president's inaugural address, which is more important, i guess, ultimately, historically important. david, please explain why you hated it so much. because it just seemed a little bit crushing. >> i didn't hate it, but i thought it was flat. i want barack obama to be a great president. i think the country needs one. the country needs a president who will be president for all the people, the ones who didn't vote for him and the ones who did vote for him. so i thought that barack obama, having won this re-election, would reach out to the country, and try to begin that process. we have big problems that have got to be solved. i thought the speech had one memorable, powerful moment. and that was when the president spoke about our gay brothers and sisters, first time ever that

that language has been used in an inaugural. and i thought that was wonderful. the rest, i thought, was pretty flat. and it was a list of things that his supporters would like to pass, on foreign policy, which i covered, there was almost nothing. it was as if the world didn't exist. the president had nothing to say. and this is a -- i said it in my piece. you would not know, listening to that speech, that there's a war going on in syria, where 60,000 people have died and america has no discernible policy. so that's what i'd fault about the speech. >> that came right after the horrible situation in algeria, which points to problems that we will have, continue can ing aroe world. >> i think -- >> but i think this meditation on the declaration of independence had its moment there, you know, on those capitol steps. and the call to citizenship. i did like that, at the end. that we were all citizens. and that as citizens, we can all do this together.

and you know, that part, that part worked for me. but i do think he's reached the point where he doesn't think he can get any cooperation for people who didn't vote for him, so he's just going for the people who did. and since that was the majority, that works for him. >> that helps. >> a practical political perspective, it seems like to me the person who probably had a problem with it was lade leid. a lot of people talked about republicans not liking it, but to be honest, the main three things he mentioned, i can't imagine from a practical governing standpoint, it will be interesting to see if they come out of the senate in the next two years. and i was john boehner and the house republicans, i would say that. if the president wants those priorities, let's see his democrat senate pass and we'll see what they look like. >> that's actually a very good point. you've got democrats in a really rough position for 2014 in the senate. and coming up in states that are -- that went republican, and you start putting democrats on the spot on something like gun control or climate change and

gay rights, and you've got a real problem. >> and that's part of the governing piece that the president's going to have to deal with in the early days of his administration. as much as the democrats, you know, feel they have the upper hand right now, and to the chairman's point, i think you'll see coming out with the vote today on the deficit, on the debt limit, the house republicans, at least saying, okay, here you go. now, pass us a budget so we can put that on the table and to the chairman's point, let's go through the litany of things that you want to do. pass them and we'll go from there. >> first smart thing they've done in a long time. >> in a very long time. i would agree. the last two years have not been in the land of the smart giants. well, how would you have framed that inaugural speech, that second inaugural speech, then? since you had such a problem with him, how would you have framed it if you were writing it? >> the speech i would have loved the president to have given would have been one that spoke about what the country and the world needs, and spoke about the

way that we can move forward with that. i mean, everybody in the white house and the president's inner circle knows that to stabilize the economy, stabilize the markets, you've got to have some kind of deal that over time deals with entitlements. democrats on the hill don't like it. and i felt as if the president was pulling back from what intellectu intellectually, he knows he needs, he knows is right, to do the thing that his partisans want him to do. it was as if -- to me, it was as if, cokie, he was giving up on this idea that it is possible to unite republicans and democrats -- >> but is the inauguration the place to do that? or is the state of the union the place to do that? >> i think it's the inauguration. the state of the union is supposed to be programatic. the inauguration is something else. it speaks to the heart and soul, i think. >> but if you're talking about entitlements, that is part of the laundry list. and i mean, he's giving the

state of the union on mardi gras, which is a problem for some of us. but presuming that we still see it, he, i think, probably will address those things. >> i hope he does. >> all right. so let's move forward. we want to look ahead to potential future leaders as well as the republican party. and we have fresh off the press is your abc news poll, cokie, which in part shows that hillary clinton has a 2016 edge over vice president biden, in terms of favorability. hillary clinton is enjoying a 26% unfavorability, 19 points higher than vice president biden, whose unfavorability sits at 37%. vice president biden was asked about a 2016 run yesterday. let's take a listen. >> is there any reason you wouldn't run? >> there's a whole lot of reasons why i wouldn't run. i haven't made that decision. and i don't have to make that

decision for a while. >> so you ready to run against hillary clinton in 2016? >> look, i've made that judgment. and hillary hasn't made that judgment. but i can tell you what. everything that should be done over the next two years, that i should be part of, would have to be done whether i run or i don't run. if this administration is successful, whoever is running as a democrat is better positioned to win. if we're not successful, whoever runs as a nominee is going to be less likely to win. >> cokie, the numbers we just put out from abc, why are they important? or are they important? >> well, they're probably not that important at this stage. you know, looking four years down or three years down is always a silly exercise, but fun. and what it does show you is that the intensity behind hillary clinton is much stronger than the intensity behind joe biden, particularly among nondemocrats.

independents, she has very high marks among, and even some republicans. so does she take a look at that and say, maybe i can be a successful crossover candidate? that's a big change from when she ran in 2008. and we'll see. i think that both of them have age problems, frankly. and joe biden would be the oldest president ever, and hillary clinton, you know, is 65 now, so if she would also be -- >> interesting questions. >> having to put together some -- >> joe, i want to get to the rnc meeting with you, but first, look at these new poll numbers on chris christie that have come out from quinnipiac university, showing him climbing to his highest approval marks ever. 74% of new jersey voters approve of the job he's doing in office. that puts him in a tie with new york governor andrew cuomo for the highest in the country. when it comes to his own party, christie has a 93% approval rating in the state. also enjoying strong support from democrats, 56% approve of the job he's doing. what do you make of it, michael

steele? >> i think it's exciting. i think christie is the model, as part of the conversation i remember having with him in early 2009, as he was launching his gubernatorial campaign, this was a different kind of guy, who's coming into government service, at the executive level. bringing a fresh argument. and the reality, and the chairman and i were talking about this earlier, one of the issues i had as chairman, as a state chairman, was the national party's view of a state like maryland was the same view that they had of a state like mississippi or south carolina. when they could not be further apart in how you govern them, how you campaign in them, and how you win. >> so how does he do it? >> so i think christie is that model for a lot of east coast candidates, if nothing else. and elsewhere around the country. what's your take on it? >> first of all, let me just say, most of the state chairman are like me. they're volunteers. i mean, i have a day job, and so i spend all my time --

>> they have been volunteers. >> that's right. i'm working for nothing and happy to do it. but my point is, i'm not up for losing elections and not being successful. so i'm glad the republicans seem to be not chasing shiny objects anymore. as far as governor christie goes, i think he'll do as well in mississippi as he does in new jersey. >> really? >> i think people appreciate his frankness and they appreciate his lack of fear to speak to people in an honest way. >> so david ignatius, i wonder how you view him. i'm sure you've followed the story. i will just say, we've known him for, gosh, five years now, and i know that he was being pushed, pushed, pushed, pushed to run and he knew he wasn't ready, and he has been working on every level to make sure that there are opportunities for his state, but also for his political career. that is also boning up on foreign policy, meeting with people one on one, and understanding the world he's studying. >> chris christie is a person who is very hard not to like. i've seen him give a speech and just shoot the lights out in a

room. you know, he could pass the hat and raise $50 million after some of the talks i've watched him give. i thought the defining moment in this presidential campaign was the images of barack obama and chris christie together, solving real problems. >> right. >> after snowstorm sandy. and being together and working together, republican and democrat. you asked, what i have liked to have more of in the inauguration address, it would have been the spirit that you saw with christie and obama. and i like the fact that after that, republicans, instead of being peeved at him, oh, my gosh, you helped o o eed out th guy, they liked it -- >> well, they were forced. >> i think the most important speech that chris christie has given was at the reagan library, where he talked about compromise and leadership. and he said, that's the way -- it's not complicated, how you

get things done. you get things done through compromise and leadership. and compromise has been a totally dirty word inside the republican party here. >> it's strange. something's wrong. >> if you can keep that theme going, it's very important. >> does it begin anew tomorrow. wrap it up with your thoughts on the rnc meeting tomorrow. >> like i said, we want to be successful. and i feel like what you've seen out of the republicans over the last couple of days is a much smarter approach, to focus on what americans care about. they have three flash points coming up, continuing resolution, sequestration, and the debt ceiling. and i think they're going to approach those in a very smart way. and i'm excited about what's ahead of us. i think reince priebus is part of the solution. i think he's done a good job. i'm going to support him, but i'm going to support him because i think he's for what's going to make our party stronger and better. and i don't want to be disrespectful, but i'm for joe biden in 2016.

i know this is a no anti-joe zone, but i think from a republican standpoint, the best chance we would have against joe biden more so than hillary clinton. >> as they say, be careful what you wish for. get your act together at home ferris. >> cokie roberts, thank you so much, joe nasef, thank you as well. david ignatius, do you want to stick around? >> yeah. up next, we have some of the other big headlines from the morning papers. keep it right here on "morning joe." i'm jessica simpson.

and this year is all about new beginnings for me. i lost over 50 lbs on weight watchers and did not have to be perfect to do it. being healthy has become a part of who i am which is great timing because i'm having another baby. i feel like i'm on top of the world. introducing the new weight watchers 360 program.

because when a weight loss program is built for human nature, you can expect amazing. join for free and expect amazing. because it works. join for free and expect amazing. ♪ ♪ hi dad. many years from now, when the subaru is theirs... hey. you missed a spot. ...i'll look back on this day and laugh. love. it's what makes a subaru, a subaru.

all right. a couple of quick headlines this morning. in the "wall street journal," british prime minister david cameron made a critical speech on the united kingdom's rocky relationship with the yaur pooen union. cameron proposed a referendum that would allow british voters to decide whether or not they should exit the eu by 2016. cameron argued, for continued membership in a more streamlined european union with fewer restrictive regulations. michael, want to do "the tampa tribune"? >> the top commander of afghanistan has been cleared of professional misconduct related to e-mails he exchanged with jill kelly, a female in the

petraeus scandal. allen had been under investigation by the pentagon when it was revealed that he sent e-mails to kelly that some officials found flirtatious. >> so the general allen situation, david, just your gut on that. what a mess. >> i don't know what the internet version of a tempest in a teapot is, but this is one where the pentagon, i think, rushed to investigate behavior, where there was very little evidence of wrongdoing. the fbi and the justice department had been reviewing all these e-mails, as part of their investigation of general petraeus. and they threw them all over the pentagon. the pentagon goes, geez, what do we do now? and they decided, gosh, i guess we better investigate them. so the inspector general at the pentagon was ordered by secretary panetta from his plane, he's traveling and says, gosh, we better do the investigation. so that's been rolling along. and there was never a thought to be evidence of real wrongdoing.

general allen has been held up. he's our commander in kabul. he's a very fine general. and so it's good that this finally ended today. >> so what we've got, 9:00 eastern time, in about 15 minutes, the benghazi hearings, and secretary of state hillary clinton. what can we expect? >> this is going to be a tough swan song for secretary clinton. she's been such a tireless secretary of state, and she's going to be held to account by republicans, who are still upset about what happened in benghazi, where four americans were killed. i think she's going to push back. i think she's going to say to congress, look, if you care this much about the security of our embassies, then you've got to pay for it. it's a fact that our embassies are told to get the lowest cost security in most places, not the best. and i think she'll say, if you want to keep our people safe, spend the money. >> as a sister of an ambassador, i'll be watching those closely. we'll be covering the hearings here on msnbc.

coming up next, business headlines with brian shactman. keep it right here on "morning joe."

[ thunder crashes ] [ female announcer ] some people like to pretend a flood could never happen to them. and that their homeowners insurance protects them. [ thunder crashes ] it doesn't. stop pretending. only flood insurance covers floods. ♪ visit floodsmart.gov/pretend to learn your risk. in the middle of the night it can be frustrating. it's hard to turn off and go back to sleep. intermezzo is the first and only prescription sleep aid approved for use as needed in the middle of the night when you can't get back to sleep. it's an effective sleep medicine

you don't take before bedtime. take it in bed only when you need it and have at least four hours left for sleep. do not take intermezzo if you have had an allergic reaction to drugs containing zolpidem, such as ambien. allergic reactions such as shortness of breath or swelling of your tongue or throat may occur and may be fatal. intermezzo should not be taken if you have taken another sleep medicine at bedtime or in the middle of the night or drank alcohol that day. do not drive or operate machinery until at least 4 hours after taking intermezzo and you're fully awake. driving, eating, or engaging in other activities while not fully awake without remembering the event the next day have been reported. abnormal behaviors may include aggressiveness, agitation, hallucinations, or confusion. alcohol or taking other medicines that make you sleepy may increase these risks. in depressed patients, worsening of depression, including risk of suicide, may occur. intermezzo, like most sleep medicines, has some risk of dependency. common side effects are headache, nausea, and fatigue.

so if you suffer from middle-of-the-night insomnia, ask your doctor about intermezzo and return to sleep again. ♪ at 49 past the hour, it's time now for business before the bell with cnbc's brian shactman. what is moving the market today, brian? >> well, mika, we have a mixed market and hover nearing five-year highs on the dow and s&p, really technology earnings. google and ibm reported late yesterday, both up in the pre-market. pretty amazing when you think about ibm. they rotated away from computers and hardware a decade ago, and it turns out it was a brilliant move. just great numbers from them. today it's all about apple. they report after the close

today. a lot of people want to see great numbers from them, because there are some chinks in the armor there, and thinking that there's a little bit of weakness there and opportunities for other technology companies. and research in motion, the blackberry getting some good buzz right now. the other thing getting buzz is jamie dimon from jpmorgan at the world

mostly, it was a day of celebration. there were musical performances from james taylor, beyonce and kelly clarkson. kelly clarkson was asked to sing "my country 'tis of three."

and as she's making her way to the podium, what do you know, it's bill clinton popping out, seeing what she's doing there. let's watch that again in slow motion. i guess the question is -- is he -- is president clinton checking her out? and the answer is yes. >> where did we go wrong? the republicans had everything going for them. a terrible economy, an unpopular incumbent, and a positive message for the american voter. less than half of you are parasi parasites. and still, still, we lost. and, folks, with america's changing demographics, it only looks bleaker for republicans in the future. unless science can find a way for latino women to give birth to old, white men.

where is the funding, koch brothers?! get on it! here's a look at your business travel forecast. it's all about the arctic blast and the cold air that has settled in. in some cases, like d.c. to new york to boston, this is the coldest air in nearly two or three years. temperatures today, barely getting up into the 20s today, around new york and boston. d.c. at 27. there have been numerous areas of snow off the great lakes. be careful driving in those locations. otherwise, have a great day. double miles you can "actually" use. but with those single mile travel cards... [ bridesmaid ] blacked out... but i'm a bridesmaid.

oh! "x" marks the spot she'll never sit. but i bought a dress! a toast... ...to the capital one venture card. fly any airline, any flight, anytime. double miles you can actually use. what a coincidence? what's in your wallet? [ all screaming ] watch the elbows ladies. i'd like to thank eating right, whole grain, multigrain cheerios! mom, are those my jeans? [ female announcer ] people who choose more whole grain

tend to weigh less than those who don't. multigrain cheerios ya. alright, another one just like that. right in the old bucket. good toss! see that's much better! that was good. you had your shoulder pointed, you kept your eyes on your target. let's do it again -- watch me. just like that one... [ male announcer ] the durability of the volkswagen passat. pass down something he will be grateful for. good arm. that's the power of german engineering. ♪ back to you. in that time there've been some good days. and some difficult ones.